DSM-G600, DNS-3xx and NSA-220 Hack Forum

I don't understand.... No replies here, no replies in D-link forums. Is it so ultra secret or there is no such issue at all or maybe everyone uses files less than 4GB. Is it so difficult to write here like "... I don't use large files" or "I have no issue with large files".

Regards,
alpha

Biscotte wrote:

Happy now?

... a little bit.... Actually you don't need to take it personally. I believe that there are lots of people using FTP with large files and I'm waiting for them to answer.

Biscotte wrote:

I am just fed up that in recent times, a number of posters have appeared on this site who unreasonably bump as though it is their God-Given right to get an answer . . .  right now.

You got me wrong....
And you're right - this site is informative, but it is not the first time I get no answer for maybe some noob question. It seems that some people are too good to answer noob questions. Ok. not a problem for me.
Back to my question. Its just too hard to believe for me that no people use large files (>4GB). By the way, you mentioned 1.05 firmware, but I have no issues with large files overall, I just have issue with FTP+large files. These large files I got through torrent client and there was no problem. Only problem is with FTP. And I'm not searching a sollution, but first I want to know if its commond issue. If so, then we need to wait for next firmware. If I'm the one who have this issue then I need to search for sollution. Thats all. No offence.

Regards,
alpha

I'm sorry guys if my second post was too rough. I didn't mean. I just could never believe that no one uses large files. Now it seems for me that this is true. So posts like ".. I don't use large files" is very informative because I know now that its true. I thought that some one opens post and if he sees no answers than he writes that he don't use and after 3-4 post everyone will know that this is the fact, we don't need 1000 post about no one uses large files. Couple of posts is enought to know. So anyway thanks.

Regards,
alpha

Thank you madpenguin. You are always nice and simple guy, allways ready to help. Thank you for spending your time on the tests.
So my problem was from external IP. Now I'm trying 9GB file in home network, but using FTP. We will see if problem still exists. I'll let you know about results.

Regards,
alpha

madpenguin wrote:

Then again, for transfering files locally, using FTP makes no sense.

<off-topic>
Huh, why? isn't FTP is the most efficient way of transferring large files? I use FTP on LAN all the time.
</off-topic>

<unhelpful>
I have no problem with large files (8,9 GB) locally. Never tried to access the NAS from external host.
</unhelpful>

Yea. This is an issue that I never bothered to look into. I only have a standard RoadRunner connection with 60kbs up. Trying to download a large file from an external IP will take forever and a year so I didn't bother to trouble shoot it.

I'd be willing to bet that if you did the same local test only briefly unplugged your cat5 cable after 4 gb, you'd probably get the same error. One thing I've noticed when ftp'ing from across the internet is that your connection constantly stalls and then has to reconnect again. This is where we are running into problems I think.

With a local gigabit connection, you don't get these timeout issues occurring. So.... Don't rule out pure-ftp. The problem, more than likely, lies with the server.

Try to enable filezilla logging and find out what it's saying, if anything.

I'll tell you what alpha... This is what I did to side-skirt the issue. It doesn't allow for uploading but I just wanted my family and friends to be able to download stuff, not necessarily upload anything.

I have a directory (not visible) somewhere in my webroot tree that is password protected with md5 digest (lighttpd.conf). I also use a redirect from http to https using a self signed certificate with openssl. So... It doesn't matter if they try to connect to that directory with http://, they get re-routed to use https:// instead. This happens before they have to enter their username and password.

Once they get in, it's a directory listing and they can browse/download to their hearts content. I think Firefox does a good job at resuming large files just incase they stall because it uses a ".part" file. Any download manager will also work to help prevent wasted time downloading in case you get bumped.

Anyway. Food for thought. So. I just keep ftp disabled on the 323. If I find myself across country and I want to re-enable ftp for whatever reason, I can ssh into the box and start it ( I have a dyndns account). If you setup your router for remote access, you can also turn on/off port forwarding from far away too, tho I don't like the idea of having remote administration enabled on the router.

All you would need to do is install openssh for windows on someones computer to get into your box. It's a small and unobtrusive program so people shouldn't mind if you ask them.

Last edited by madpenguin (2009-03-18 18:58:09)

madpenguin wrote:

Also, as another work around hack, you could use winrar and dice your large file up into 50mb chunks. Then someone could download all the chunks and re-assemble them on their computer.....

Yes ! This is a very good idea !!! I'll try to do this and it will be just like I want.

madpenguin wrote:

You might try to build a better ftp client for funplug and try your luck at that. I have a sneaking suspicion that you won't have any problems if you use another FTP server....

I agree with this also. I think we'll need to wait for some fixes about this problem.
You mentioned to use openssh for windows. Isn't this the same as PuTTY ?

Regards,
alpha

madpenguin wrote:

I think the best bet is to get chroot working with openssh's sftp....

Have you tried this ? I tried just to connect to FTP through SSH and was success, but every user got access to root folder. I have no idea how to chroot evey user....

I just thought about security.... Ok if I don't need to use sFTP, but I need to somehow disable user access to shell. I mean all FTP users can access my DNS via SSH. Is it any way not to let users in into box via SSH, only FTP.... If I use /bin/false as login shell for user then this user can't login to FTP too. I'm searching forums about this, but no luck....

alpha wrote:

Is it any way not to let users in into box via SSH, only FTP.... If I use /bin/false as login shell for user then this user can't login to FTP too. I'm searching forums about this, but no luck....

vi /ffp/etc/ssh/sshd_config

#--add the below--

PermitRootLogin no
AllowUsers alpha
DenyUsers admin nobody billy joe ralph

Change your port number too. Every little bit helps. Don't forget to do it in your router as well...

Then do a chmod 600 on it. From now on, ssh in as "alpha" and then "su -" to root if that's who you need to be.

Last edited by madpenguin (2009-03-20 02:10:31)